FaRmLaNd said:
Not at all, because criticising religion is nothing like racism, ethnicity is something you're born into, that cannot be changed and makes no statements at all in regards to morality or anything at all. Religion makes numerous claims that aren't backed up by evidence, relies on faith (or belief without evidence), attempts to regulate peoples lives, makes statements about morality and can be changed or completely discarded. Criticism of religion is thus not at all the same as being racist. And saying you have to accept the consequences is besides the point, the person that breaks the law is the one in the wrong, not the person using their free speech. Killing people for creating a film or drawing a cartoon or forcing a person to go into hiding for writing a book is NOT an appropriate response in a secular country that enshrines the rights of freedom of speech. More speech in response is what should and mostly does happen. The moment a person takes the law into their own hands because someone said something they don't like is the moment the line is crossed, not before it. If a person feels the need to change ones offense into violence then they are the ones that need to be desensitised and get over it (or debate the point or whatever). Only people using that free speech will achieve that. People who self censor only perpetuate such issues. Blasphemy is thus one of the most important ways to exercise free speech. Because religion is one of the major institutions that have killed over such things in the past. Without criticism of religion we might as well have nothing.
|
i don't even disagree with you, the part you were contending about you are right about as well. The only thing that can change it is to desensitize people. It is not an appropriate response but it is not an unexpected or surprising response right now. The same goes with the mosque.
currently playing: Skyward Sword, Mario Sunshine, Xenoblade Chronicles X







